What's the current science on sex/gender differences as far as nature goes?
As a MtF who has interests which are exceptionally masculine even as far as men go, I've always been interested in this question but unfortunately I don't really understand statistics, biology or psychology so reading studies is a bit difficult
I've noticed the following things
1. the debate is mostly focused on ability rather than interest, so for example it's never about whether boys naturally like mathematics more but rather about whether boys are naturally better at mathematics, if a boy likes playing with a truck it's always put in the context of future careers with the implication that girls are somehow worse at engineering for example and so when they prove that girls are equally as good at mathematics and physics in school they dismiss the difference
2. sometimes the fact that there are differences in interest and behaviour from a very early age is accepted but because the authors are so tunnel visioned on careers they dismiss these differences as being very small and essentially meaningless (probably just saying the same thing desu)
I understand that there's definitely an additional factor in terms of interest vs ability, I doubt someone's ability would be affected by social factors beyond say, the access to practice but I find it hard to accept that if these researchers admit that from a very young age boys prefer playing with trucks compared to girls then the difference in interests in adolescence/adulthood is entirely nurture
Is the whole empathising-systemising theory still taken seriously today btw?
As a MtF who has interests which are exceptionally masculine even as far as men go, I've always been interested in this question but unfortunately I don't really understand statistics, biology or psychology so reading studies is a bit difficult
I've noticed the following things
1. the debate is mostly focused on ability rather than interest, so for example it's never about whether boys naturally like mathematics more but rather about whether boys are naturally better at mathematics, if a boy likes playing with a truck it's always put in the context of future careers with the implication that girls are somehow worse at engineering for example and so when they prove that girls are equally as good at mathematics and physics in school they dismiss the difference
2. sometimes the fact that there are differences in interest and behaviour from a very early age is accepted but because the authors are so tunnel visioned on careers they dismiss these differences as being very small and essentially meaningless (probably just saying the same thing desu)
I understand that there's definitely an additional factor in terms of interest vs ability, I doubt someone's ability would be affected by social factors beyond say, the access to practice but I find it hard to accept that if these researchers admit that from a very young age boys prefer playing with trucks compared to girls then the difference in interests in adolescence/adulthood is entirely nurture
Is the whole empathising-systemising theory still taken seriously today btw?
